Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: tc-list ALAND'S ERRATA, too many

Expand Messages
  • Bruce Prior
    TCers – Yes, Gary S. Dykes is correct. There are errors in NA27 and perhaps in UBS4 as well. I also agree with his judgment that Reuben Swanson’s works
    Message 1 of 3 , Oct 11 2:52 PM
      TCers �

      Yes, Gary S. Dykes is correct. There are errors in NA27 and perhaps in UBS4
      as well. I also agree with his judgment that Reuben Swanson�s works are of
      superior quality. I have found in my work on the Freer Gospels (W or 032)
      that Swanson�s rendition of W is far superior to any of my predecessors.

      However, both Dykes� and Swanson�s assertions about "errors" in NA27 need to
      be more nuanced. Except for his decision to add diacritical marks
      regardless of manuscript evidence, Swanson is a textual strict
      constructionist. If Swanson can see the text in the manuscript, he notes
      it. He almost always refuses to insert any conjectural readings. I
      examined those "errors" which Swanson enumerated regarding P45 in Acts which
      NA27 labels ut videtur. I concluded that in some cases, at least, Swanson
      has merely emphasized differing editorial presuppositions in NA27 rather
      than real errors.

      The NA27 introduction states the editors� position explicitly regarding ut
      videtur readings:

      "vid (= ut videtur) indicates that the reading attested by a witness
      cannot be determined with absolute certainty. This is frequently true of
      papyri and palimpsests. Corrections may also require the sign vid if the
      original reading of the manuscript is no longer clearly legible. The sign
      vid always indicates a high degree of probability, usually based on some
      surviving letters or parts of letters. When an inference is drawn from the
      extent of a lacuna, it is carefully verified that the manuscript cannot be
      cited equally well for other readings in the tradition." (NA27: 55*)

      I will not go into the details of my incomplete analysis here, but suffice
      it to say that P45 indeed "cannot be cited equally well for other readings
      in the tradition" in Acts 7:18 and 11:12. In the case of Acts 14:18, the
      reading cited by Swanson is not attributed to �45vid in the 16th, 26th or
      the 27th editions of Nestle-Aland. There is no list of witnesses which
      support the NA text, only those which support the insertion. The critical
      apparatus of the first, third, and third corrected editions of The Greek New
      Testament cite P45vid to support the text without that insertion. The
      variant reference is entirely absent from UBS4, however.

      Let me repeat: there ARE errors in NA27. For example, contrary to the
      readings of Henry A. Sanders, Edgar J. Goodspeed, S.C.E. Legg, Reuben
      Swanson and myself, the Muenster group continues to stand by its reading of
      BOOZ ... BOAZ for W in Matthew 1:5 as detailed in the Variae Lectiones
      Minores section, page [719] in NA27. The correct reading is BOOZ ... BOOZ.
      The omicron which the Muenster group misreads as an alpha is distorted by a
      crinkle in the manuscript, but it is still clearly legible in the 1912
      Facsimile of the Freer Gospels. The opening page of Matthew happens to be
      one of the four pages of the original W manuscript in its sealed transparent
      plastic case which scholars can examine in the vault of the Freer Gallery of
      Art in Washington, DC. Perhaps somebody in the DC area might take the time
      to get an appointment to see the manuscript and confirm the reading of
      Sanders, Goodspeed, Legg, Swanson and myself.

      According to Klaus Wachtel, an apparatus error regarding the reading of W in
      Matthew 15:18/19 will be corrected in future editions of NA.

      In Matthew 17:24, W reads TO for TA in two cases. The NA27 text leaves the
      first TA unmarked, but only in the second case does the apparatus mention
      the TO variant in W and others. Is this an error? I would call it an
      editorial inconsistency.

      My major difficulty with NA and UBS is their implicit acceptance of a
      certain standard orthography, and their refusal to recognize most spelling
      variations in the manuscript tradition. In some cases, the spellings which
      their own text uses seem hard to justify. The spelling of DAUID, for
      example, rather than DAUEID or DABID is based on extremely thin manuscript

      J. Bruce Prior in Blaine, Washington

      >From: "Mr. Gary S. Dykes" <yhwh3in1@...>
      >Reply-To: tc-list@...
      >To: "tc-list" <tc-list@...>
      >Subject: tc-list ALAND'S ERRATA, too many
      >Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 22:25:33 -0700
      >Again I hog the world of cyberspace. But I need to correct myself.
      >I have always assumed that scholars were aware of the HIGH number of errors
      >found in the apparatuses of the editions of the Nestle/Aland New Testament
      >(25th - 27th), and in all editions of the UBS versions. (May the American
      >Bible Society take note).
      >I was wrong. So I must inform some scholars that all modern editions of
      >Nestle/Aland work have an unacceptable amount of errors. Reuben and I
      >calculate 5 % error rate, that is for every 100 readings in their
      >5 are WRONG. Even scholars such as Fee who quote Aland's apparatus are
      >found quoting errors! Thus Fee did not first test Aland. In fact ALL
      >scholars who refer to readings in Aland's NTs need to first verify the
      >Reuben lists about 385 errors in the Aland 26/27th editions in just ACTS
      >alone, and Reuben carefully lists these errors which he found in the Aland
      >work. Simply look for the list in the back of Reuben's ACTS, page 499ff,
      >argue with that list!! Reuben also gives a giant list of errors in
      >GALATIANS. Myself, I quit recording all of the errors which I found in the
      >Nestle/Aland editions. Too many. And I thought all were aware of these
      >errors. So beware. Reuben's NT is, even in this early stage, the most
      >accurate edition I have ever tested. I find myself spending hours and hours
      >collating chapter after chapter of Reuben's work, only to find a single
      >error, sometimes I find no error. I have done this with most Greek NTs, and
      >Reuben's work is impressive. So if his work is available for the text you
      >need, I suggest using it for accuracy, NOT the Aland editions.
      >The only accurate work I have seen coming from Munster (in or of the Greek
      >NT) is the "DAS NEUE TESTAMENT AUF PAPYRUS" this text is fairly
      >though a few errors are still seen in its apparatus. The level of accuracy
      >was improved with this work because of the fine work done by Klaus Witte, a
      >good collator at the Munster facility.
      >Should someone wish to set up a site illustrating the errata in the Aland
      >editions my advice is get a BIG site with lots of megabytes available.
      >at your service,
      >Mr. Gary S. Dykes
      >visit this site:

      Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.